Fortune Favours the Bold: An Agent-Based Model Reveals Adaptive Advantages of Overconfidence in War

Verfasser / Beitragende:
[Dominic D.P. Johnson, Nils B. Weidmann, Lars-Erik Cederman]
Ort, Verlag, Jahr:
2011
Enthalten in:
PLoS ONE, 6 (6), p. e20851
Format:
Artikel (online)
ID: 528784889
LEADER naa a22 4500
001 528784889
005 20180924065517.0
007 cr unu---uuuuu
008 180924e20110624xx s 000 0 eng
024 7 0 |a 10.3929/ethz-b-000037916  |2 doi 
024 7 0 |a 10.1371/journal.pone.0020851  |2 doi 
035 |a (ETHRESEARCH)oai:www.research-collecti.ethz.ch:20.500.11850/37916 
100 1 |a Johnson  |D Dominic D.P. 
245 1 0 |a Fortune Favours the Bold: An Agent-Based Model Reveals Adaptive Advantages of Overconfidence in War  |h [Elektronische Daten]  |c [Dominic D.P. Johnson, Nils B. Weidmann, Lars-Erik Cederman] 
246 0 |a PLoS ONE 
506 |a Open access  |2 ethresearch 
520 3 |a Overconfidence has long been considered a cause of war. Like other decision-making biases, overconfidence seems detrimental because it increases the frequency and costs of fighting. However, evolutionary biologists have proposed that overconfidence may also confer adaptive advantages: increasing ambition, resolve, persistence, bluffing opponents, and winning net payoffs from risky opportunities despite occasional failures. We report the results of an agent-based model of inter-state conflict, which allows us to evaluate the performance of different strategies in competition with each other. Counter-intuitively, we find that overconfident states predominate in the population at the expense of unbiased or underconfident states. Overconfident states win because: (1) they are more likely to accumulate resources from frequent attempts at conquest; (2) they are more likely to gang up on weak states, forcing victims to split their defences; and (3) when the decision threshold for attacking requires an overwhelming asymmetry of power, unbiased and underconfident states shirk many conflicts they are actually likely to win. These "adaptive advantages” of overconfidence may, via selection effects, learning, or evolved psychology, have spread and become entrenched among modern states, organizations and decision-makers. This would help to explain the frequent association of overconfidence and war, even if it no longer brings benefits today. 
540 |a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported  |u http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0  |2 ethresearch 
700 1 |a Weidmann  |D Nils B.  |e joint author 
700 1 |a Cederman  |D Lars-Erik  |e joint author 
773 0 |t PLoS ONE  |d Lawrence, KS, USA : Public Library of Science  |g 6 (6), p. e20851  |x 1932-6203 
856 4 0 |u http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11850/37916  |q text/html  |z WWW-Backlink auf das Repository (Open access) 
908 |D 1  |a Journal Article  |2 ethresearch 
950 |B ETHRESEARCH  |P 856  |E 40  |u http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11850/37916  |q text/html  |z WWW-Backlink auf das Repository (Open access) 
950 |B ETHRESEARCH  |P 100  |E 1-  |a Johnson  |D Dominic D.P. 
950 |B ETHRESEARCH  |P 700  |E 1-  |a Weidmann  |D Nils B.  |e joint author 
950 |B ETHRESEARCH  |P 700  |E 1-  |a Cederman  |D Lars-Erik  |e joint author 
950 |B ETHRESEARCH  |P 773  |E 0-  |t PLoS ONE  |d Lawrence, KS, USA : Public Library of Science  |g 6 (6), p. e20851  |x 1932-6203 
898 |a BK010053  |b XK010053  |c XK010000 
949 |B ETHRESEARCH  |F ETHRESEARCH  |b ETHRESEARCH  |j Journal Article  |c Open access